Petition Calls for Suspension of College Republicans at Elon U. Over Alleged Insensitive Comments
“disgusting, racist, dispicable, vile, hurtful, wrong, and should not ever be the values that exist within any club at the university”
Members of the College Republicans allegedly said some insensitive things about Black Lives Matter. You can call Trump a fascist and call Republicans racist, but speaking ill of BLM in any way is just not allowed.
The College Fix reports:
Petition wants suspension of Elon U. College Republicans due to members’ ‘insensitive’ comments
Cancel culture has come to Elon University after two members of the College Republicans made allegedly insensitive comments about the death of Breonna Taylor and the conduct of Black Lives Matter.
According to the Elon News Network, the former president of the Elon College Democrats, Carly Zaccaria, began a petition a week ago calling for the suspension of the Elon CR because one member appeared to justify Taylor’s shooting by police.
The other said Black Lives Matter “caters to the lowest tier of society” and “turns criminals into martyrs.” (Screenshots of the comments can be viewed at the ENN article.)
In the petition, Zaccaria refers to the comments as “violent,” and demands all members of the Elon CR “undergo mandatory anti-bias training.”
The CR members’ comments were “disgusting, racist, dispicable, vile, hurtful, wrong, and should not ever be the values that exist within any club at the university,” Zaccaria wrote.
Jamie Barfield, one of the two College Republicans who made the comments, said “I know myself, and know there was not racist intent behind the words I said. That being said, a lot of people who don’t know me, have seen that comment. If someone did not know me, I can see how they would perceive that comment to be racist.”
As to her remarks about BLM, Barfield noted they weren’t directed at black Americans in general but “against the way the movement is being conducted.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Who said, “You don’t want the truth, you can’t handle the truth”?
Col. Nathan Jessep said it, and boy, do we ever need him now!
Ask the next BLM person who gets in your face to name one of the last ten black men murdered in Chicago.
Ask them to name a black known for accomplishments like science, the law, or the arts, and I mean real arts, not jungle-grunting to a drum machine track.
Sir,
I choose to assume that your comment has more to do with your views on BLM protesters rather than a “canceling” of Black giants such as Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter (two men who for a long time I did not know–and once I learned I did not care–that they are Black), Clarence Thomas, Phyllis Ann Wallace, and, of course, Jimi Hendrix, among so many others.
For your information, I’ve lately surprised myself by coming to really appreciate–for the first time in my life–certain rap artists, such as JDeuce, Soldier Hard, and other members of Redcon-1 Music Group, whose raw storytelling so resonates with this older-generation military veteran that, I have just learned, I cannot type their names without crying.
As a lifelong classical liberal (aka hardcore conservative/libertarian), I am discouraged and disgusted by your conscious use of clearly racist language, and I believe it is a poor reflection, a very poor reflecion on Legal Insurrection itself, a website to which I turn frequently for thought-provoking, often amusing or outraging news and insight. Further, I am further discouraged that at the time of this writing you had received at least one “thumbs up.”
I am not a member of a crazed social media beatdown posse, so I will respect any apology, if one is given, so long as it is based on realization and real repentance–not for my sake (for who am I to hope for such a thing), but for the sake of this normally respectable and respectful website, captained by respectable and respectful people.
You have started my day with sadness. I do not thank you.
Good post, if genuine, not sure why downvoted.
Hieronymous, I do not think that Grizzly’s point is that blacks do not have any scholars and artists, but that the thugs of the BLM movement cannot name them. Right now, I have Wynton Marsalis on the stereo blowing an amazing horn (one of several CDs he personally gifted to me), but I will not listen to any rap, hip-hop or whatever they may call it, regardless of the race of the performer.
I treat Grizzly’s comment like the challenge to any Black Lives Matter supporter to name any of the blacks murdered by other blacks in Chicago this past weekend. If Black Lives really do Matter, why is it only the relatively few blacks killed in police interactions — whether justified on the part of the cops or not — that matter? I’d rather the movement focus on the huge number of blacks killed by black thugs in street wars or the even larger number of black babies killed by Planned Parenthood.
I think Grizzly’s point is about the cultural knowledge of today’s thugs and is not intended to deny black achievements.
TL;DR: “Jungle-grunting?” Seriously?
Single-sentence summary: That, even among the reasonably informed and supposedly enlightened, one may publicly perpetuate so negative a stereotype–not of Blacks, mind you, but of how certain groups are believed to *think* about Blacks–and do so unfreighted by compunction or criticism or even by a smidge of concern that some in the forum, particularly but not exclusively its Black attendants, may resent in the smallest degree their unwilling participation in what may be “intended” as a bit of titillative rascality but instead gives evidence that animosity and contempt (“jungle-grunting?” *Seriously*?) indeed ever dwell just below a veneer of social nicety is, IMO, deserving not of up-thumbs but of censure.
Long form (and much longer than intended or, by some, deserved):
“I think Grizzly’s point is about the cultural knowledge of today’s thugs and is not intended to deny black achievements.”
As noted: That is what I, too, assume; however, the language used to emphasize what, in the author’s opinion, is not to be considered among the so-called _real_ arts (i.e., the sentiments immediately following “I mean real arts, not ‘jungle-grunting”) is a conspicuous and deliberately racist rhetorical construction.
Anyone with any situational awareness–and I am confident that “The Friendly Grizzly” is not ignorant in this regard–would at the very least cringe and, better yet, condemn such language.
The author’s choice of words, IMO, fails a very. simple. test.: Is this something you would say to a friend who happened to be Black? Would you share this sentiment at town meeting? At a party?
Frankly, IMO such an obviously odious construction shouldn’t be uttered even in front of one’s closest friends, lest they offer rebuke, and rightly so. Heck, even if you *really* thought that way, you likely and smartly wouldn’t give voice to that thinking within anyone’s earshot.
Why then, among an “anonymous” audience, is it (A) “safe” to give voice to so ugly a thought, one that, sadly, seems sincere, and (B) “safe” to assume that no one in the forum–no participant, no casual reader, no legal contributor or lurker–would find such language objectionable? Sorry to bring up Clarence Thomas again, but I hear he from time to time takes an interest in legal matters: Should vile spew color his view of this forum? (And remember: The interwebs is forever.)
I ain’t braggin’ (because one could claim any circumspection on my part springs more from self-interest or -preservation than from brotherly love), but I have engaged in sometimes provocative trollery for more years than I care to admit (you think I made up this handle just for *this* forum?), and I believe that I have not made any comment that (yet) could be held up as evidence of inherent racism. I state again, as a conservative, I hold it as a truth that we are all created equal under G-d and the Constitution.
I, too, take umbrage with “thugs”; however, I find it likely that a substantial percentage of what is meant by “thugs” consists of anarchists, antifa, and suburban wannabes. Even more so, do you think the Occupy Seattle goons consist more of local “thugs” than of imported antifa a la the MainzerStraße or Rota Flore crowds (“Proudly takin’ a mighty squat since 1989!”)?
And I, too, am agog at the raw emotion of BLM (likely some lack of empathy on my part), but I believe it to be fanned by a breathless media, supported by Lefty politicians, and infiltrated by professional agitators: Just take a gander at the ARMED guards in “CHAZ” (now “CHOP”).
Just as we’ve lost the will to fight wars (I don’t mean run missions, I mean prosecute *war*), I have no expectation that we can root out antifa, whether from Seattle or from BLM.
As for my thoughts regarding race relations, I don’t know what form it will take but I admit that my view has recently shifted. While I still reject genuflection and obeisance, I have come to acknowledge to a greater degree than before the concept of “white privilege.” I regret that Ahmaud Arbery had to be my teacher. Christian Cooper–whom I would like to hang out with–also lent a hand (BTW: His experience is in no way a new thing; use the search terms “black” and “birdwatcher” for articles, rules, and warnings stretching back at least a decade. Also, I may added J. Drew Lanham to my Ben Shapiro bro-crush list).
Whew: Sorry for all that; I’m unusually emotional under the dual influences of COVID-19 and civil breakdown. I likely will not comment again, or at least for some time. Please forgive me for any typos or errors: Why doesn’t Legal Insurrection allow editing? (At least *my* access does not allow editing.)
Peace out. (Yes, that was ironic.)
“rap artists” Rap and art should never be used together. I don’t care if it reflects their degenerate life. Glorifying degenerate, dead end lifestyles does nothing to improve black lives.
Black cultural problems cannot be fixed as long as we allow them to lie about their problems.
Whites are not the cause of, and never have been the cause of the way black society has degenerated since the fifties.
BLM doesn’t represent the interests of Black Americans but simply uses Black issues to advance a Far Left agenda.
Anything that I disagree with is now “insensitive” .
I do not find the statements made by the two CR members to be racially offensive.
Gabrielle Sable’s comment that Brionna Taylor is at fault for being shot is foolish, but not racist. As a libertarian, I usually think that someone responding to a “no-knock” invasion by law enforcement with deadly force is justified. No-knock invasions invite a deadly firefight. Ms. Taylor’s boyfriend was justified in responding to the invasion with deadly force, and the cops did not have moral justification to defend themselves, because they were in the wrong and were responding to justified force. But Ms. Taylor did not say anything racist or offensive, just something very shallow and trite.
As to the comment by Mr/Ms. Barfield that BLM caters to the lowest tier of society, I think this is true, and I do not see anything racist about it. The rioters and looters, of whatever race, are the lowest tier of society!
The CR should have refused to act against these individuals, instead of catering to the “demands” of the woke.
The CR president should be tarred and feathered. Those comments may have been unpleasant for some to hear, but if that were the overriding standard, we would have a world of mimes. It looks like these guys are swamp republicans, GOPe, and should change the club’s name to reflect this.